C-27J Spartan

Initial test flight complete with HF 2.1. Need to go back and check, but seems I have excessive fuselage roll on both start and taxi. Using the "autostart" function, left engine start and left roll started close to 5 degrees AOB. Slow taxi with 90 degree turns out of parking show the same AOB. Engine spool times seemed pretty quick as well as did initial acceleration at 62K GTOW.

All autopilot modes worked perfectly, including speed hold.
 
Victory103 said:
Initial test flight complete with HF 2.1. Need to go back and check, but seems I have excessive fuselage roll on both start and taxi. Using the "autostart" function, left engine start and left roll started close to 5 degrees AOB. Slow taxi with 90 degree turns out of parking show the same AOB. Engine spool times seemed pretty quick as well as did initial acceleration at 62K GTOW.

All autopilot modes worked perfectly, including speed hold.
Click to expand...

Thats a problem with the engines and props. I modeled them as close to reality as i could get ( which isnt too shabby ) but the way FSX handles turbo props is way off kilter, and causes them to have too much power on the low end and too low of power on the high end. I pretty much shot for the middle. That means you have too much power at idle, and almost enough power at the top end. I apologize for this. I'm afraid you'll just have to brake when you load it up.. should stop in a few feet..
Pam
 
I feel lucky to be flying this plane.

-I use the same start up procedure post 2.1 hotfix, as I used pre 2.1 hotfix. The plane no longer drifts badly, or rotates on an axis.

-I have a cockpit roof artifact, a hole in the model. It was present before changing resolution and monitor (1920x1080). Perhaps some day, it can be fixed.

126AleniaC27.jpg
 
The pic above isnt a error. That's padding that covers the upper flight deck screens. If your the PIC or FO you'll be thankful for that padding in a crash or shattering during combat. That padding is also present in the USCG HC44 and the two USAF C27's I had the privilege to work with when they in Iqaluit, when I was there observing for RCAF Arctic Ops.
 
Thanks CG you are absolutely right! I saw this the other day and has asked David about it, he did explain it to me, then I forgot to post! Crazy brain! :) But yes, it isn't an error.

~K

CG_1976 said:
The pic above isnt a error. That's padding that covers the upper flight deck screens. If your the PIC or FO you'll be thankful for that padding in a crash or shattering during combat. That padding is also present in the USCG HC44 and the two USAF C27's I had the privilege to work with when they in Iqaluit, when I was there observing for RCAF Arctic Ops.
Click to expand...
 
CG_1976 said:
The pic above isnt a error. That's padding that covers the upper flight deck screens. If your the PIC or FO you'll be thankful for that padding in a crash or shattering during combat. That padding is also present in the USCG HC44 and the two USAF C27's I had the privilege to work with when they in Iqaluit, when I was there observing for RCAF Arctic Ops.
Click to expand...

The blue slash in the box is padding? I haven't seen that blue padding before. Is it like foam padding, as opposed to the upholstered stuff?
 
Dave Torkington said:
Sundog,

Go to external view and you'll see the black upholstered padding through the rearmost glass roof panels. So, from the pilots seat, you're seeing a little of the roof glass past the black padding...

View attachment 63563

Dave.
Click to expand...

So, not to sound too bizarre, is it more of a sun shade, otherwise, why put windows up there? Not ciriticizing the model, just the design feature. I think it's great attention to detail, but there are windows up there for a reason, I would imagine......
 
strykerpsg said:
So, not to sound too bizarre, is it more of a sun shade, otherwise, why put windows up there? Not ciriticizing the model, just the design feature. I think it's great attention to detail, but there are windows up there for a reason, I would imagine......
Click to expand...
G'Day Matt, CG answered it below:
CG_1976 said:
The pic above isnt a error. That's padding that covers the upper flight deck screens. If your the PIC or FO you'll be thankful for that padding in a crash or shattering during combat. That padding is also present in the USCG HC44 and the two USAF C27's I had the privilege to work with when they in Iqaluit, when I was there observing for RCAF Arctic Ops.
Click to expand...

Sundog, the "blue slash" is not the padding, it's the visible sky through the window behind the padding. If you notice in the blue, it's the same sky blue as what is above the pilots head. I had to tilt my laptop screen, but if you get it right you can actually see the edging of the protective cover. Dave T has posted a really good photo showing from the external view, I think it explains it really well.

Think of it as a "bubble in the curtain". :)

Sundog said:
The blue slash in the box is padding? I haven't seen that blue padding before. Is it like foam padding, as opposed to the upholstered stuff?
Click to expand...

Dave Torkington said:
Sundog,

Go to external view and you'll see the black upholstered padding through the rearmost glass roof panels. So, from the pilots seat, you're seeing a little of the roof glass past the black padding...

View attachment 63563

Dave.
Click to expand...



Thanks everyone,
~K
 
CG_1976 said:
That's padding that covers the upper flight deck screens. If your the PIC or FO you'll be thankful for that padding in a crash or shattering during combat.
Click to expand...

The most practical aspect of the padding would be in blocking the sun's radiation, to lessen the green house effect.
 
Bone said:
The most practical aspect of the padding would be in blocking the sun's radiation, to lessen the green house effect.
Click to expand...

Lol, Except when your in the Arctic in Winter, then you just tear it away and watch the Northern Lights.
 
Well, not being an aircrewman, I guess I'm still perplexed as to why put windows there, only to cover them up in case you crash...which would beg the question, why bother putting in the windows.....again, not a criticism of the model, since it's actually on the plane itself. Perhaps the it's the Italian version of the $5000 toilet seat debacle.

Anyway, great looking model, but still haven't flown it but once because of the existing issues. When do you guys project a final fix or is it even possible, based on the challenges of the FDE reported by Pam. I'm greatful to see what's been addressed but am hoping for a more final SP. I know you've posted the hotfix, but that term usually suggests a placeholder until the next SP. Do you have an approximate ETA as to when an SP might be released and it's details?
 
strykerpsg said:
Anyway, great looking model, but still haven't flown it but once because of the existing issues. When do you guys project a final fix or is it even possible, based on the challenges of the FDE reported by Pam. I'm greatful to see what's been addressed but am hoping for a more final SP. I know you've posted the hotfix, but that term usually suggests a placeholder until the next SP. Do you have an approximate ETA as to when an SP might be released and it's details?
Click to expand...

Thanks Matt.

The Hotfix addresses the issues with the FDE that had been reported to us, it addresses also a number of other issues (as previously listed) and is termed as a "Hotfix" as you don't need to reinstall the complete product package, simply install the fix to your existing plane.

What other issues do you still have concerns about?

Regards,

Karen
 
Thanks for the heads up with regards to the hole in the VC. I'm cool with that. With the latest hotfix it's a lot of fun to fly in FSX. Really dig the plane.
 
IRIS said:
Thanks Matt.

The Hotfix addresses the issues with the FDE that had been reported to us, it addresses also a number of other issues (as previously listed) and is termed as a "Hotfix" as you don't need to reinstall the complete product package, simply install the fix to your existing plane.

What other issues do you still have concerns about?

Regards,

Karen
Click to expand...

OK, feeling a bit sheepish here. I am a total yahoo for somehow missing all the postings in page 20 of the thread about hotfix 2.1. It was the arguements prior to the incorporation of Pam's FDE. So, will happily download 2.1 tonight and give her a whirl around Orbx Australia, NZ and Antartica. This will be a great week if this is finally fixed. Thanks for being tolerant and looking forward to giving her some virtual hell down under.

:guinness:
 
strykerpsg said:
Well, not being an aircrewman, I guess I'm still perplexed as to why put windows there, only to cover them up in case you crash...which would beg the question, why bother putting in the windows.....again, not a criticism of the model, since it's actually on the plane itself. Perhaps the it's the Italian version of the $5000 toilet seat debacle.
Click to expand...

Just slightly OT, but the windows are there for the actual role of the Spartan. This medium tactical transport would be flying in a low level flight environment, and those windows would help in the visibility department. Coming from another airframe with "greenhouse" windows (H-60), they elevate the cockpit temps well into the 120's+ F, but are great to have down low in over 30 angle of bank turns and overall visibility.
 
IRIS said:
Thanks Matt.

The Hotfix addresses the issues with the FDE that had been reported to us, it addresses also a number of other issues (as previously listed) and is termed as a "Hotfix" as you don't need to reinstall the complete product package, simply install the fix to your existing plane.

What other issues do you still have concerns about?

Regards,

Karen
Click to expand...

The flap gauge is still broken. Minor I know but it is a model issue so we can't fix it with changes to the XML.

Dave
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top